:-) I guess the difficult part is that the "entry-level" gimmick-loaded 6d has better performance than the venerable pro 5d2 that has been used winning "photographer of the year" awards ... but you're correct, it's simply the way tech evolution works.

Imho the only important reason to buy a new 5d2 over a 6d is that the older model has higher sharpness @low iso, next to the pro-style usability with the joystick which might mixing 6d & 5d3 a hassle.

I've seen used 5D2's for as low as $1000, and at that price you really cant go wrong. But if the 6D is $1699 then I think that's a viable option, especially considering how much newer it is. Just the ISO performance alone seems worth the extra money. And I know it may not seem like a big deal, but the LCD on the 5D3/6D is just gorgeous. After using the 5D3 for 6 months I shot with the 5D2 again and thought there was something wrong with the screen it looked so bad.

I have a 7D at work. My friend has a 5D2... I have not shot a lot with her 5D2 but from when I have I can safely say that it beats the C__P out of the 7D in low light/high ISO. It has to be 3 stops faster... I can't speak for AF as I have not had the two of them side by side for a realistic comparison.

Personally, If I were to go out today and choose between the two, I would get the 5D2.

I have no idea how it compares to the 6D.... although the wireless seems interesting. The 5D3 is supposed to be a stop or two better than the 5D2 and a few other incremental improvements, but once again, just hearsay... I have not used one.

In actual use, the 6D will fail in everything the 5D2 will performance wise and no better than the 5D2 in getting the shot. Same FPS, nearly identical terrible AF, and 98% viewfinder. The 5D3 will have none of these limits.

So why waste those extra 500$? Get another lens. Don't waste it on the fluff from the 6D and that's why I consider it bad value for $$$.

In which way? 6D AF center point is way MUCH BETTER 5D II, so what is your point?

your still stuck only using the center point. That's the issue.

Are you saying 5D II has better outer AF points then 6D? Both of these cameras should be considered as 1 point AF system. 6D center AF would kick 5D II in the rear in lower light.

I'm saying that the outer AF points on either camera are awful but I've never had a problem with the center AF on the 5Dc or 5D2. What I'm saying is the 6D outer points are still rubbish and virtually no improvement over the 5Dc/5D2

I hope your statement is based on first hand experience with both the 6D and the 5D2, and not based solely on spec sheets or assumptions and hearsay, since I don't really think it's a good idea to dismiss something based on assumptions or specs without hands-on experience.

I wouldn't give comments on the products that I haven't touched. I owned 5D II before 5D III. I played with 6D from 1st patch for 2 days. AGAIN...6D center point would kick 5D II in lower light.

Look, this is really simple. Really. The 5D2 and 6D have equal performing outter AF points. The 6D's center AF point is better. The 6D has slightly better DR. In a strict comparison, yes the 6D has improvements over the 5D2. Not difficult to understand.

+1....the only thing they see is price tag - it's sad. All saving $ will go straight into alley purchases

6D or 5D Mark III if you can afford it. I got my 5D3 for $2600. Keep on the lookout for deals. If you can afford it, keep your 7D and 17-55. You'll miss it if you sell it. If your 18-135 is the first edition, sell it or give it away. It's a piece of crap, for lack of a better description. Actually if there was a EF mount on a real piece of crap, it might take better photos. Obviously, you know that already, since you don't use it anymore.